kitexpert wrote:
No. Soul does not have anything like Psycho4 in its wingtips. Very different kites. Soul adjustments are just fine tuning, fortunately.
They are for fine tunning but they can be used to create an effect similar, but obviously far from the same as the Pyscho4.
kitexpert wrote:
When depowered Psycho4 wingtips "fly on their own", not much supported by bridle.
I may have agreed with that a few years ago, but the bridles do play a part. Of particular note is the progressive positioning forward on the cord of A as it moves out on the tip.
kitexpert wrote:
So it is questionable if bridle adjustments affect much (more like they can disturb the effect) or do the wingtips affect much on how kite drifts, I doubt it.
Well I am an expert on this kite and I have played with the bridles and the sewn shape, but unfortunate not bridle positions. The bridles most definitely do have a part to play and altering them alone will change the effect, as will altering alone the sewn shape change the effect and too I would think altering the bridle positions alone would change the effect. It carries like with everything to a foil kite that all it's parts can play a part. It is neither solely the bridles or the canopy but the synergy of both. And from that thinking to achieve this effect you would I think have to look at all parts involved. Maybe one needs to be used more than another but they can all be used.
kitexpert wrote:
Anyway this question is quite meaningless because P4 is so old and wingtips of it were considered weirdly behaving by many and FS don't produce anything like it anymore.
Yes the Psycho4 is old, but it is still mostly at the pinnacle of kite design. Which means there is not kites more advanced than some things it has or does. If it's design has unnecessary things removed, and then maybe a few other things done, it is and would be a much better kite. It is maybe not a kite for everyone and everything, but as a kite sold for freestyle it was ok but is excellent in the surf. The tips would mainly behave weird when out of tune, that behavior can though be beneficial for drift and surf, so it is possible to choose if it is desired. The main negative to the Psycho4 is from the way it increases it's PA. It does so when also increasing it's AoA. This has the rather large negative that the kite misses some fine points of high performance achieved at low AoA and high PA. Overall though it does achieve an extreme amount of range and when paired with something like a hydrofoil then any lack of the fine range of performance is not to be noticed unless maybe you were racing but then the kites for that are so radically different than even the AR of the Psycho4 it is not a comparison to be made.
Flysurfer can actually still make the Psycho4. It is however so easy to update some basic things about it, that would also make production easier. I am not sure if at all much demand even like that would exist it would likely need a little more work, I think mainly to make it lighter and I would prefer faster, though it is already quite a fast kite. Technologies like LE stiffeners could help but I don't like the weight.
Now seeing something like the peak 4 coming at the problem from another angle is lessening the need for something like a Psycho4. But then the Peak4 doesn't jump well and the Psycho4 does... I have to laugh for so many years it's said you couldn't have a wave kite go upwind well or jump well and since 2008 it has already existed LoL.
kitexpert wrote:
OK. There is for sure a limit in which kite AoA (and line rows with it) can reach.
Thinking of it solely as a limit to AoA is too primitive. While technically it is mostly true but it is more a limit to a section of AoA between A and B that is limited. While I am sure B being pulled down then some or all of the kite will come some way with it, it is more technically correct to say it is altering the camber and the AoA and maybe if alone more correct to say the camber, though I would surrender that point. Physically you are looking at a limit on B as that is the only bridle other than A that has tension. From a maintenance point of view it is better to look at it like that, that B has a limit.
kitexpert wrote:
If mixer pulley lines are long enough - not restricting kite - it is not very relevant to know what it is.
It is not just whether the pulley lines are long enough but if B main and the B bridles are long enough too. Which sadly is never true for any of them, at least on Flysurfers or Panshes. It is largely not important exactly how long the pulley lines are for the full depower limit to be reach but just a sole number which is the amount B extends at it's limit past A, or the AB limit.
kitexpert wrote:
I don't get how to measure it in flight and why it should be done.
I didn't say anything about that? just that it may be different, I think I have observed it so. It would be easy enough to mount a camera and observe and then estimate measurements from that. The applicability is mainly to understanding design and principles better, it is not applicable to tuning.
kitexpert wrote:
bigger kites need more length for their mixer, but 100cm SPL has proved itself to be long enough.
Yes but again a 100cm SPL does not stay 100cm. I would say 100cm is maybe on the border of too little for bigger kites, I know it works but I feel just a little more AoA for relaunch etc could be useful.
kitexpert wrote:Depowering means you make kite fly at lower AoA
It also lowers the camber.
kitexpert wrote:
When depowering has happened to its most effective manner kite flies on its A line row only.
Not really, maybe you mean when it is fully depowered? Most depower occurs with some tension still in B and then sometimes with some also still in C and then a tiny bit with tension also in Z. Maybe it is just semantics on whether you consider a kite powering or depowering though.
kitexpert wrote:
Then mixer (and possible tunings) are ineffective because all pulley lines and brakes are loose.
Yes when a line is slack it is not of importance but at some stage it should have tension again, it is when and how much it tensions that still remains important.
kitexpert wrote:
How much kite can depower or tolerate low AoA's does not have much or anything to do with the mixer, it is mostly a kite build-in property.
Yes if the mixer is not limiting it. On foils I have seen, the limit for the mixer only releases full tension on B at the window edge and only if the bridle and mixer pulley lines haven't shrunk which they always have.
I think it would be cool to have kites with multiple A positions but then also the profile can have some of this effect and Flysurfer has the PMAs for that, which is really cool for Flysurfer and shows how much in advance of others with Foil kite design they are. Something for an updated Pyscho4 for sure.
kitexpert wrote:
If kite can't tolerate flying on A line row only some additional support from B line row is needed, how much it have to be tested by flying and adjusting. In this situation some (at least theoretical) depowerability is lost.
I will add as well how and when the mixer pulls in camber effects how a kite tolerates depower. With more camber pulled at the mixer if you shock with sudden full power then depower, the resulting momentum built up will send the canopy into a negative AoA and cause a luff. You can avoid it by reducing the depower, or camber (or not moving the bar so quick). Then of interest, the way FS adjusts the mixer always achieves the opposite, which I think is bad. You lengthen B and C, so achieving more camber and more depower so then the kite is more likely to luff. Then when you shorten B and C you get less camber and less depower but the kite can tolerate more depower, but then maybe it is desired to reduce depower and make a kite "even" more stable, but I disagree with that philosophy completely. The adjustments should be independent for depower and camber. One reason maybe to just not adjust B, and another for simplicity.
kitexpert wrote:
BTW FS's "Triple depower" is a bit misleading, camber change is not for depower but for power, kite increases camber when powered. When kite is depowered camber is the "original" shape of the airfoil.
The mixer can actually go thru 2 states, decrease camber powering and then increasing it. The decreasing part is mainly focused on when B is solely tensioned. This is important as it gives the lest increase of power while also improving the stability of the kite. It is why a little bit of bar tension can dramatically improve a foil kites stability. You get a transition then to C engaging and while technically it will also reduce camber it will also dramatically increase the power from the wing, because it is positioned further back on the cord. It is basic physics that more of the wing is being forced into the wind so there is more pull or power. So for that reason which is more a usability one it is better to engage B for longer. When you engage Z then camber increases and also you want C to fill in the gap. You should already be at high AoA so increasing camber is not an issue here for stability, but if you want best L/D you can't have engaged B too much or Z, and C needs to be just right though it seems quite tolerant. Not so easy but opens so much customability for users that they are more likely to end up in the weeds playing with things than find much useful. The solution is to stick to what the designer has with his grand experience found is best though most likely only for him or his team rider/s. Oh and if you start moving bridle positions then you need to think as things being quite different and more like the position they are close too. I must admit I haven't grasped wing warping yet, the Aurora 3 has C running an A position at the tip. My mind has it how it works but then I couldn't get it to work when I modified my A15 to be 3 rows only.
kitexpert wrote:
if B mains is very short adjustability is difficult to make or it becomes impossible.
You can do away with B adjustment if you have C and Z adjustable and some way to extend or change the travel of the pulleys like a stopper knot.
jakemoore wrote:
I find it most useful to consider tuning kites from the opposite point of view. That is to say the airfoil and bridle are best tuned for max performance in the powered state. Bar and lines are tuned with the bar at max power. The mixer test even before it was named is performed at max power bar lines equal. The long mixer test again before it was named performed as if the kite is max power bar at the chicken loop and 4 lines equal.
It is a good reference point to have some of the mixer at 0, in this case A and Z, then all of your settings become that of B and C in relation to A and Z. Alternatively and in many ways simpler you could have the reference point as A,B and C at 0 and your settings are that of Z in relation to them at 0.
You can assume that the mixer at even and the lines even is max power, but that is not correct and actually causes a misunderstanding about what causes max power for a kite. It is a combination of higher air speed and AoA. A kite will usually produce it's most power at close to it's top speed and the AoA will vary but is usually much less than close to stall. Of note is static flight in different wind speeds, what is the highest power with highest AoA in one wind speed will stall the kite in a lower windspeed. There is no static point for kites at which they make the most power for all wind speeds. It is why you largely have a trimmer, so that you can dynamically adjust to have close to what feels like a static point of trim, when none actually exists. The all lines even is the correct point is just an illusion. You only have what is your comfortable sheet point and range.
jakemoore wrote:
On triple depower kites as in FS and CA Smart and Wave profile momentum folds the tips reducing projected area.
Momentum is an interesting way of looking at things, but here doesn't cover everything. To change PA you can force things with the bridles and or the sewn shape of the kite. And in each of them there is multiple ways. With the bridles you have the lengths, so basically the arc shape and then also you have the placement on the bridles, like the cord position etc. With the kites sewn shape you have the camber, but you can also change AoA cell to cell. It is like twisting the shape. The Pyscho4 quite literally uses all of them. You though don't need to uses all of them! You can produce the effect with the use any single one of them. As to which is better to use or what combination? It is all a very complicated design path. Flysurfer gave up on the amount of PA change achieved on the Pyscho4 after the Psycho4 and each proceeding kite seemed to have less and less. I think achieving a kite with this that has all desirable quality's is difficult. The solution would have been to actually take the Pyscho4 and make small iterative changes. It is the only way to improve something that is already quite good. The wrong thing is to make a already difficult design harder and drop a whole bridle row.... like they did with the successor to the Psycho4, and then also stuff the marketing up by calling it a Speed...
It is great FS found their footing with race kites and the soul and peaks, but it is sad that a kite that with only minimal design improvement can be so much better, is still relevant and yet not available like that. I think the market for Mid AR is quite legit. Given concepts like on demand production then spending a couple days changing things a bit and only making whats sold can't cost that much.
jakemoore wrote:
Yes when the wing is depowered the kite takes the form of its sewn shape and as adjusted by PMA. But the tuning and bridle changes to get back to the intended design recover the original shape of the powered kite.
The bridle is always influencing the shape even when depowered, it is a balance between the sewn shape and the bridle.
kitexpert wrote:
In Soul this thing is much weaker than it was in P4, if it is there at all. Soul has much flatter canopy curve than P4 has, especially in wingtip area.
It would be interesting a kite that had already a high PA but went even higher. Kites like the warrior had an incredible amount of power for their size. It was like nearly completely flat!
kitexpert wrote:
I don't know however how much PMA can affect on this, I guess not much.
Small camber changes to the sewn shape have a dramatic effect to this. So it is likely the PMAs can do quite a bit.
kitexpert wrote:
To measure changing in-flight areas is quite challenging task, or it is some kind of estimate I don't know.
It is relatively easy using images and the right software.
kitexpert wrote:Many kites increase PA slightly when powered up.
Many LEIs decrease PA powered up as well...
). The goal has been to make more solid feel than before, which doesn't fit very well to changing PA. Also 2D shape and canopy curve hint it isn't there.